Friday, December 17, 2010

Ultraman Ace episode #38 has got to be one of the weirdest Christmas episodes in all of TV history. If you can read Japanese, here's a synopisis of the episode. It's got lots of neat frame grabs from the show even if you can't read the text.

Basically, the snow monster Snowgillon attacks Tokyo. A gigantic mustachioed, but beardless Santa Claus (see photo) battles the creature. I think he gives Ultraman Ace some kind of special ray power to deal with the beast too. Then Santa turns out to the Father of Ultra, the daddy of all the Ultramen. In the end he flies away on a silver sleigh along with the Minami, who had been part of Ultraman Ace's alter ego (it took two people to transform into Ultraman Ace, Hokuto, a man and Minami, a woman, but Minami left some time in the series).

Weird. Just weird.

My friend Takeshi Yagi directed a far less weird Ultraman Christmas episode called "Ellie's Christmas" in 2005 for the series Ultraman Max. There's a brief synopsis of that episode here.

I'll be spending Christmas at my sister's house where my dad is coming to join the fun. I like Christmas. It's fun.

I just spent the whole morning writing a Christmas-themed article, which will appear on the Suicide Girls Safe For Work Blog on Monday. I'll put the link up here once I get it. So I'm not gonna write a lot about Christmas here.

Here's a question from the mailbag:

"What is wrong with my anger at why the world is wrong? The Clash gave me a code to live by in the song 'Clampdown,' 'let fury have the hour,anger can be power.' What I want to know is, why must I kill my anger toward things which are wrong? Exploitation of workers, rape, sexism, racism, fascism, conservatism, militarism, Islamic female circumcision practices, universal health care, and most importantly, the environment are my biggest concerns. And for as long as I can remember, the complete lack of general concern for these issues has thoroughly pissed me off. But like The Clash said, anger can be power and I have always believed that getting angry, really fired up about the world's problems is the best way to solve them. When I get angry about, say litter, it just reminds me to recycle a little more and consume a little less.

You get the picture right? Anger can be useful in solving problems, in dealing with injustice. Do I still have to kill my anger toward injustice?"

My answer:(I always start with "my answer" because these articles go up on Facebook and all the careful formatting I do disappears)

The answer is that there is nothing "wrong" with your anger. People are constantly characterizing me as an "angry" person based on my writing. I think that I'm not as angry as I used to be, but I'm still just as angry as I used to be. Which is a typically contradictory "Zen" way of saying that even though I'm angry still, I don't get angry about my anger like I used to.

In other words, the emotional component of what we call "anger" is clearly useless. It doesn't help anything. And yet when I hear about the stuff you've described, it pisses me off. Lots of things piss me off.

But when questioned in a similar manner about anger over the troubles of the world after his talk, Alan said something to the effect of, "I try to limit my intake of TV news." I like that advice. Our duty is to deal with the shit right in front of us. But we get sidetracked by the tons and tons and tons of information we are now able to receive about things we really can't deal with because they're too far away or they're too big, etc.

You can easily drive yourself into a tizzy over all the stuff there is in this world to get angry about. I have no doubt that if/when we establish communications with creatures from other planets, it won't be long before there are people on Earth wringing their hands over the unfair treatment of the Krell in the Gomular fields of Regizon IV. It's just human nature to feel like that.

But anger as an emotion gets in the way of what you need to do to effectively deal with those things you're angry about. It blinds you with rage and you don't see the real solutions right in front of you.

Sure anger, in one sense, can be power. But the emotion of anger isn't very powerful if you ask me. It's debilitating.

So it really depends what you mean by the word "anger." I'm angry at sexism. But it doesn't do me any good to sit and stew over it. When there are cases of sexism that I can do something about, I do what I can do. Like maybe if I was there when Ultraman Neos was fondling that poor girl in her Santa outfit I might say something. But not if she was clearly enjoying the attention. My general feeling of anger over the issue remains as part of my personality whether I'm acting on it or not. But it makes no sense to get emotional about things I can't do anything about. The general overall problem of sexism is far too big for one person to fix.

This doesn't mean I have a lack of concern. The whole idea that being all emotional about big issues is a way of being concerned is kind of a red herring. It's something that seems to be relevant to the issue at hand when it really isn't.

When you talk about "being fired up," I think what you're really referring to is holding on to a part of your sense of personal self. You fear that if you don't hold on to your anger, it will go away and you'll just be complacent. In my experience this is not what happens at all. You don't become complacent. You become more relaxed and more realistic about where you can help and where you cannot.

So, Brad, what advice could you give to someone who suffers from being angry at being angry, other than "don't be angry about being angry"? Is the only solution doing lots and lots of zazen, and being angry in the meantime?

When you talk about "being fired up," I think what you're really referring to is holding on to a part of your sense of personal self. You fear that if you don't hold on to your anger, it will go away and you'll just be complacent. In my experience this is not what happens at all. You don't become complacent. You become more relaxed and more realistic about where you can help and where you cannot.

Good topic. 'Angry people' are essentially no more angry than other people. It's just that they have habitual responses (more pronounced and seemingly inevitable ones) to the stimuli that they associate with feeling under threat and angry: They act it out based on learned responses to cues, and subsequent behaviors as the circumstances of their lives seem to dictate. It sometimes seems as if our whole personality is geared to irresistibly go the 'anger' route, but this needn't be so.

This is wonderfully simple and rational when it's written down of course, and we can grasp the point easily, but it's a different story when it comes to challenging the learned responses and subsequent behaviors that we've rehearsed for our whole lives. It seems there's different cues for different people, but an initial stage of challenging acting angry may be to recognise our cues, the thoughts and feelings (physical and emotional) that we identify with as our being 'angry'. Zazen, while it's certainly no 'silver bullet', may help us discern how the fiction unfolds from there and that, actually, we can make a choice in how we respond to our thoughts and feelings and how we behave.

Brad, regarding aliens, do you think another intelligent beings of this universe would also have developed a system similar to zen or would they even have need for such? Do you think it could be concievable to have an intelligence that wouldn't need to find a way to deal with the things like we do?

Getting angry about social issues is usually based on ego."Why can't those idiots see that what I do (or believe) is right and what they do (or believe) is wrong!!??"

Getting angry about personal issues is usually based more on several events that happened in the past and less on one event that is happening in the present."Why does everybody always do this to me!!??"

As for Christmas, it's a materialistic, capitalistic scam.If you meet the Santa on the road, kill him. That goes for Baby Jesus, too.

In other words, the only problem with being angry is that being angry feels like you’re doing something about the problems, when you’re really not. It’s a luxury. The workers of the world couldn’t care less if you’re angry, they’re still being oppressed. If you want to solve the goddamn problems, you have to stop indulging on luxury and actually DO stuff.

I’m not a particularly angry person but instead tend to be depressed and guilty. One day I realized guiltiness is a luxury. From then on I’ve been trying not to indulge on it. I find zazen helps me notice when I’m being too self-indulgent. Not that I’ve become a perfectly mindful person, mind you.

Anger gives you power - buuut it's *always* raw and blind power! I remember reading a koan about this topic where a zen priest compares using the power of anger to stealing a diamond from the head of a dangerous snake - you might get bitten.

I write a letter, donate money occasionally, post it on Facebook if I think others might care, or all of the above. Being angry about an issue and doing nothing but fume about it is unhealthy because it is stressful and a waste of time. If it is anger over something no one can do anything about, I talk or email someone else in the same predicament. For example, after a suicide in my family, feeling very sad with some anger, my daily practice for a while was to phone or email various family members plus talking with my husband. The deceased was a veteran so I look for opportunities to put my 2 cents in on mental health issues of veterans. One of his stresses was his wife's impending death from breast cancer. I can donate. Sit down. Shut up. Then get up and do something.

I'm in shock. RIP Don Van Vliet, my favorite painter and of course, perhaps this century's most original rock musician. Composer of the best song ever writ, IMO, with the coolest guitar solo:

BIG EYED BEANS FROM VENUSDistant cousins, there's a limited supply.And we're down to the dozens, and this is why:Big Eyed Beans from Venus! Oh my, oh my.

Boys and girls, Earth people around the circle,Mixtures of man alive.Big eyed beans from Venus,Don't let anything get in between us.

Beam in on me baby,and we'll beam togetherI know we always been together, but there's more.

Mister Zoot Horn Rollo, hit that long lunar note,and let it float.

Men let your wallets flop out, and women open your purses,Cause a man or a woman without a big eyed bean from VenusIs suffering with the worstest of cursesYeah, you're suffering, with the worstest of curses.

Put 'em out in the sun, and when the night comeYou don't have to go out and get 'emThey'll glow with youThey'll go with youThey'll show with youAin't no losersCause they're on the right trackCause they're on the right trackYou can be on the right track, woman,Of course, of course

Ain't no SNAFU, no fol-de-rol

Check these out, Big eyed beans from VenusOh, let a few out, let 'em pass in between us

Distant cousins, there's a limited supply.And we're down to the dozens, and this is why...

Don't let anything get in between us!Big eyed beans from VenusBig eyed beans from Venus.

I see a lot of "righteous" anger as just another way to define "ME" vs. "THEM". its easy to feed that sense of self when you go around comparing how much more aware and indignant than "those people" who arent as red-faced as you are about whatever cause has gotten their dander up.

I have also found that the more someone is "into causes" the more they generally act like an asshole to everyone around them. Id say it is better (and more effective) to be nice to the guy behind the counter at starbucks than it is to throw a brick through their window.

So Jack, how long have you been involved with this effort towards saving sentient beings (SSB)?

Fred, I’m glad you asked me about that. I got my start way back in the early 60’s; this was long before it was even know as SSB. In fact, back then we sometimes just called it ‘cruising for a$$holes’ Ha! Yeah, those were the good ole days….. It was tough going in the beginning cause all we had was the concept and no book or teacher to guide us. We had no federal funding as of yet and not even a van to put the a$$holes in while we were trying to save them.Lucky for us there were plenty of a$$holes to practice on. We probably killed a dozen or more before we finally got the hang of it. But hey, if you’re going to bake a cake you have got to break a few eggs, right Fred? Ha!

It seems that anger can be a powerful motivator (that oftentimes becomes an excuse after the fact...) but it also always seems to distort the object of one's anger.

In other words, when we get angry at something, it often turns the object into a dragon, when in reality it may be a gnat (or maybe not even there at all!)

Two problems with that--the obvious one is we think we're fighting a dragon when we're not--the other not so obvious problem is that we think we become knights in shining armor, or damsels in distress, or helpful hobbits, or wizards, etc.

Ya, Segal, guys who think that way seem to end up shouting allah ho akbar and showering innocent people with their bile. Go ahead a cling to your "right" beliefs like the flotsam they are, but be sure to swim for the island when you see it.

tattoozen said: 'Id say it is better (and more effective) to be nice to the guy behind the counter at starbucks than it is to throw a brick through their window.' Even better (and more effective) is to not go to starbucks at all, but find an independent cafe that serves free trade coffee. One of the most consistent, useful and non-angry ways we can do something in this fucked up world is by putting our money where our mouth is.

Jennifer Michael Hecht is the author of Doubt: A History. She defines doubt generously, broadly addressing the human impulse to question what is given in order to invest one's days with meaning. This hour we'll explore Socrates and Benjamin Franklin, Job and Zen Buddhism in this intriguing light.

Doubt:a history http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/doubt/index.shtml

"I know that the people who hate me are as well-intentioned as those who love me. Nobody does anything because they think it's a bad thing to do and will lead to suffering. Everything everybody does is motivated, skillfully or unskillfully, by a desire to be happy, for things to be all right. Even the worst, most destructive behavior, isn't ill-intentioned."

I don't do anything because I think it's a bad thing to do and will lead to suffering. Everything I do is motivated, skillfully or unskillfully, by a desire to be happy, for things to be all right. Even my worst, most destructive behavior, isn't ill-intentioned.

"Omnivores (from Latin: omni all, everything; vorare to devour) are species that eat both plants and animals as their primary food source. They are opportunistic, general feeders not specifically adapted to eat and digest either meat or plant material primarily." Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_omnivores(Please note the omnivore starting with the letter "H".)

"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken." Tyler Durden

The basis for morality/ethics/precepts is whether or not our actions cause conscious creatures that can suffer to suffer.

We don't have moral obligations to rocks because we don't think that they can suffer. That's why we are more concerned about our fellow primates than we we are ants. As we know they can suffer more.

That's why if you're driving down the road and a bug gives up the ghost on the windshield you don't feel that bad, not as bad as if you hit a dog. Why because we know there is a lawful relationship to the complexity of a creatures nervous system/brain and it's ability to suffer.

If you cannot see this simple fact/relationship of cause and effect then you have had your moral intuitions blinded by some absurd religious metaphysics, or you are simply trying to ease your conscious with lies/illusions.

________________________

In the words of George Bernard Shaw:We are living graves of murdered beastsSlaughtered to satisfy our appetites.We never pause to wonder at our feasts,If animals like men could possibly have rights.We pray on Sunday that we may have light,To guide our footsteps on the paths we tread.We are sick of war, we do not want to fight,And we gorge ourselves upon the dead.Like Carrion Crows we live and feed on meat,Regardless of the suffering and painWe cause by doing so, in this we treat,Defenseless animals for sport or gain -How can we hope in this world to attainThe peace we say we are so anxious for,We pray for it o'er hetacomba of slain,To God while outraging the moral law,Thus cruelty begets the offspring --- WAR !

_______________________________

A man is ethical only when life, as such, is sacred to him, that of plants and animals as well as that of his fellow man, and when he devotes himself helpfully to all life that is in need of help. Dr Albert Sweitzer (1875-1965)

Any religion or philosophy which is not based on a respect for life is not a true religion or philosophy. Dr Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965)

That is to fundamentally misunderstand the Buddhist view of "karma" (karma=action/vipaka=effect/ cause&effect). That is the Hindu view of karma which the Buddha rejected, karma as fate/destiny. The Buddha introduced the importance of intentionality into "karma"(actions), thus making each action dependent/connected to choices we make.Buddhist karma is choice making, each moment, we choose actions that harm ourselves and/or others, or not, or actions that alleviate suffering of ourselves and/or others.

To follow the Hindu (fatalist) view of karma, yes, it is the chickens (Hindu) karma to be eaten. Yes, it was the Jews (Hindu) karma to be killed by Nazis. Yes, it was the (Hindu) karma of all of the children raped by catholic priests, as it was their (Hindu) karma to rape them.This is why the Buddha rejected the Hindu concept of karma, where people were born to be slaves/or a certain caste, it's their (Hindu) karma to be slaves.

The Buddhist view of karma, and ethics (Eightfold Path/Precepts), is right here, right NOW, in the present moment, THIS moment I make choices moment by moment, with a deep understanding of interdependence/cause and effect, do my actions cause suffering???

Then there was an appeal to authority, by quoting scripture to justify causing suffering. Instead of quoting scripture/sutras back and forth to support to support a view, which we could ad infinitum/ ad nauseumI will just say, if the Buddha did eat meat (there's some debate on whether the Pali word actually means spoiled pork or poisonous mushroom)that does NOT make it right or ethical to do so !!!!

That is like the southern plantation owners quoting scripture to justify slavery. It is their Divinely sanctioned (Hindu)"karma" to be slaves.

In the Laṅkāvatāra & Aṅgulimāla sutras the Buddha explicitly prohibits the eating of meat, fish and any animal products which are the result of harming and killing of any sentient being. The Buddha states the only time it is acceptable to accept and eat the flesh of sentient beings is for medicinal purposes only if the animal died in accordance with the Dharma, meaning the animal died of natural causes.

In Mahāyāna Chinese Buddhism (Zen Buddhism)and in those countries to which Chinese Buddhism has spread (Korea, Japan, Vietnam), Buddhist monks are more strictly vegetarian. One of the scriptural sources for this prohibition is the Mahāyāna Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. This sūtra condemns meat-eating in the strongest terms.

Although vegetarianism is not expressly commanded in the Pāli canon, it is evidently viewed as an ideal; the Aggañña Sutta (DN.27).________________________The Ethical Precepts and Philosophical Tenetsof Zen Buddhism

1. I will be mindful and reverential with all life, I will not be violent nor will I kill.

Avoid killing or harming any living being.I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures. I shall endeavor to protect and take care of all living creatures.Do not do harm to other beings.

“If a person does not harm any living being…and does not kill or cause others to kill -that person is a true spiritual practitioner.”- The Dhammapada

Thich Nhat Hanh "Aware of the suffering caused by the destruction of life, I undertake to cultivate compassion and learn ways to protect the lives of people, animals, plants, and minerals. I am determined not to kill, not to let others kill, and not to condone any act of killing in the world, in my thinking, and in my way of life."

It was hysterion's foul karma to eat the poor fowl. Motivation makes the difference between actions. But, as always with hysterion, there is the aspect of ignorance to consider. Even a well-intended act by an ignorant mind can return bad results.

"This is why a lot of Buddhists fail to quote the words of Buddha and instead are more likely to quote the words of more recent teachers like Dogen, for example, or their own teachers. You can't really rely on what's written in books.

"I've been reading about the Koran lately and it's fascinating. In some circles it is dangerous to advance the idea that anything in the Koran might be mistaken. So folks who want to try and modernize Islam are forced to stretch and bend what's written in the Koran to make it work in the modern world. Many Christians, Jews, Hindus and even Buddhists feel the same way about their scriptures. But Buddhists who feel that way about the words of Buddha don't really understand the words of Buddha very well.

"This is why Buddha, in the Kalama Sutra, cautions people against believing what is written in scripture. And note that I ironically have to refer to Buddhist scripture here. But understand, it's not because the Kalama Sutra is supposed to be the words of Buddha that impresses me. It's because whoever wrote it, it makes damn good sense. This is also why people in the Mahayana tradition often accept words attributed to Buddha that we know damned well Buddha couldn't possibly have said since he was already long dead when those sutras were written."

I lived in a world for a while where everything was bullshit. If I had of found it to be a nice, or even slightly more tolerable, place then I might be more inclined to agree with you. What a pompous ass I was to think everything bullshit!

As it stands my current world of pompous assery seems better for all concerned.

For countless years, the bitter stew of hate goes boiling onIts vengeful broth is ocean deep, impossible to calmTo learn the cause of so much conflict, terror, hate, and warListen to the cries at midnight by the butcher's door

Around this lonely mountain top, myriad peaks revolveI've come to cultivate ascetic's displined resolveI take my broom and sweep away the deer's tracks in the snowThe deer past by, but in the morning, hunters will not know

Buddhist song: Might as well cultivate/Gotta Do Something http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGHT3odq3xs___________________Buddhist Song: Magic Circle http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X481W1P2CTs___________________GREAT IS THE JOY

They say that one who seesWith eyes like blazing wisdom sunsThe suffering of all beingsWill weep for evil he has doneWho would have guessed the Buddha's lightIllumines the place beyond space and time?Who would have guessed that all alongThe treasure of his wisdom lies within your own mind?

Great is the joyGreat is the joyGreat is the joy within my heart

What you are is what you have doneWhat you do, you will becomeDon't keep looking for what you never lostTurn the light around, take yourself acrossThe sea of suffering is deep and wideA turn of the head is the other side

The sea of suffering is deep and wideA turn of the head is the other side

Just a note that may have already been posted (I didn't read through all the comments):

Female circumcision is a regional practice, not an Islamic one. Certainly the areas where it is practiced are primarily Islamic, but that and the practice have nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, why does this questioner feel the need to get angry about another culture's practice. Certainly it's painful, and I would never suggest it, but if one were to go and speak with people in the region before formulating a judgment, one would see that it is, in their eyes, important.

Simply because it is strange to us doesn't mean it's wrong, or should be greeted with anger. Try to understand before you judge.

I'm a vegetarian. I started being a vegetarian maybe 6 months to a year before I started doing zazen. But I'd been a half-assed vegetarian for maybe 4 years before that, basically all through high school. YOU try being a full-assed vegetarian as a teenager in Wadsworth, Ohio in the early 80s!

When I got into Zen, I started hearing all the counter arguments against vegetarianism. And there are a lot of them. Maybe I'll flesh (meat?) this comment out into a full blog post that includes them.

So I asked my teachers, both Tim & Nishijima if I ought to drop the vegetarianism stuff. Neither of them are vegetarians.

They both encouraged me to keep being a vegetarian. So I still am. I think it's a good habit. I would only advise vegetarians not to be too full of themselves about how much better we are. Of course, we are better. We just need to not be so full of ourselves over it!

I don't know.. Glossing over anger and transforming it into personal happiness seems indulgent. While you can “easily drive yourself into a tizzy over all the stuff there is in this world to get angry about”, you can also become so personally lazy that you forget or rationalize away the primary reason that we exist in the world, which is to help others. Is being relaxed the most efficient state to be in while trying to sort out and help change the things in this world that are clearly wrong? Or should we engage it like our hair is on fire? Suppressing emotion when emotion is called for is just wrong. Personal transformation should not be the motivation for Buddhist practice. That is too limiting. Buddhist practice should be about reforming injustice and engaging it's sources.

My experience as a vegetarian has less to do with how I view other's eating habits (don't care)as it has to do with how they view mine. Sometimes with interest, most often with righteous justification of their eating meat, and other times I am treated as a full-on weirdo.

It also depends on the environment, as Brad says. When I visit more cosmopolitan environs, there are always many vegetarian choices, whereas here in the beef-belt, its a side salad and a handful of crackers at Sirloin Stockade, yep.

How can Buddhists eat other mammals when it isn't necessary most of the time and causes an untold amount of suffering to the animals affected? The people who engage in this practice seem to feel that if they are properly mindful and grateful when indulging, all is good.